ALBERT

Description: Background: The trombopoietin receptor agonists (TRAs) romiplostim and eltrombopag are effective and safe in the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). However, when no response is achieved or when adverse events occur with one TRA the value of the sequential use of romiplostim and eltrombopag has not been clearly established. Here we have evaluated the efficacy and tolerance of using eltrombopag after romiplostim in ITP. Methods: Fifty-one primary ITP patients (aged 18 years or more) who had been sequentially treated first with romiplostim and then with eltrombopag in the Spanish Eltrombopag Registry were retrospectively evaluated. In accordance with the usual standards, complete response was defined as a platelet count of 100x109/L and a response as a platelet count of 30x109/L or a count of at least twice the initial (pre-treatment) value. This study was performed in accordance with the standards of the Helsinki declaration and approved by the Hospital Universitario de Burgos Ethics Committee. Results: The median age of our cohort was 49 [range, 18–83] years. There were 32 women and 19 men. According to the standard definition, patients were allocated to newly diagnosed (n=2), persistent (n=5) and chronic (n=44) ITP groups. The median number of therapies prior to administration of eltrombopag was 4 [range, 2–9], including splenectomy (39%), rituximab (33%) and romiplostim (100%). The median duration of romiplostim use before switching to eltrombopag was 12 (IQR 5–21) months. The reasons for switching from the romiplostim to eltrombopag were: lack of efficacy of romiplostim (n=25), patient's preference (n=16), platelet-count fluctuation (n=6), and side-effects (n=4). The initial response rate to eltrombopag was 41/51 (80.5%), including 67% (n=34) of cases with complete remission. After a median follow-up of 13 months with eltrombopag, 39 patients maintained their response. When eltrombopag was used for patients who were refractory to the maximum romiplostim dose the initial response rate of eltrombopag was 25%. However, 83% of patients who relapsed after their initial response to romiplostim responded to eltrombopag. Sixteen romiplostim responders requested their physicians to switch them to eltrombopag because they preferred an oral drug. The efficacy was maintained after switching in all 16 patients. In the platelet-count fluctuation group, the initial response rate was also 100%. All 4 patients who were switched to eltrombopag because they experienced side-effects of romiplostim achieved complete remission with eltrombopag and their adverse events were resolved. 16 / 51 (33%) patients experienced one or more adverse event during treatment with eltrombopag. The frequency of grade 3–4 adverse events during treatment with eltrombopag was 9.8%. Conclusion: The use of eltrombopag after romiplostim for treating ITP is effective and safe. The reason for discontinuing romiplostim was associated with the response to eltrombopag. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Description: Background: Eltrombopag is effective and safe for treating chronic immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) patients who have not responded to previous therapy. Interestingly, some patients in whom hemostatic platelet counts are achieved with eltrombopag may sustain the platelet response when eltrombopag ceases to be administered. However, the frequency of sustained responses after discontinuing eltrombopag without additional therapy for ITP is largely unknown. Methods: A total of 260 adult patients (aged 18 years or more) with primary ITP treated with eltrombopag included in the Spanish Eltrombopag Registry were retrospectively evaluated. The study was performed in accordance with the standards of the Helsinki declaration and approved by the Hospital Universitario de Burgos Ethics Committee. Results: The median age was 62 [range, 18–93] years. There were 165 women and 95 men. According to the standard definition, patients were allocated to newly diagnosed (n=29), persistent (n=36) and chronic (n=195) ITP groups. The median time from diagnosis to eltrombopag initiation was 24 [range, 1–480] months. The median number of previous therapies was 3 [range, 0–10], including splenectomy (22%), rituximab (23%) and romiplostim (19%). The initial response rate to eltrombopag was 231/260 (89%), including 77% (n=201) cases of complete remission (platelet count ≥100 x 109/L). The median duration of eltrombopag treatment was 6 [range, 1–54] months. Eltrombopag was discontinued in 80 out of 201 (39.8%) patients who achieved CR. Reasons for eltrombopag discontinuation were: persistent response despite a reduction in dose over time (n=33), platelet count 〉400x109/L (n=29), patient’s request (n=5), aspartate aminotransferase elevation (n=3), diarrhea (n=3), thrombosis (n=3) and other reasons (n=4). For analysis of discontinuation, patients with follow-up 〈 6 months (n=15), newly diagnosed ITP (n=11) or patients who received concomitant or previous (6 months before) treatments at the start of eltrombopag use (n=5) were excluded. Of the 49 evaluable patients, 22 (45%) had an immediate relapse after stopping eltrombopag. One patient with sustained response after stopping treatment relapsed at 10 months. A total of 26 patients (53%) showed sustained response after discontinuing eltrombopag without additional ITP therapy, with a median follow-up of 9 [range, 6–25] months. These patients were characterized by a median time since ITP diagnosis of 46.5±114.1 months, with 4/26 having ITP

Description: Introduction: Carfilzomib dosed at 56 mg/m2 twice a week in combination with dexamethasone (Kd) is a standard of care for RRMM after 1-3 prior lines (PL) based on the ENDEAVOR study. Later, the ARROW study showed Kd dosed at 70 mg/m2 weekly to be superior to Kd dosed at 27 mg/m2 twice a week on RRMM patients (pts) after 2-3 PL. On the other side, Cyclophosphamide is an alkylating agent that has been widely combined with proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs in MM, improving their efficacy with a good safety profile. In this phase 2 randomized study, we have compared Kd plus cyclophosphamide (KCyd) with Kd in RRMM after 1-3PL, both with K dosed weekly at 70 mg/m2. Patients and methods: RRMM after 1-3 PL of therapy were included in the trial. Consistently with the ENDEAVOR population, previous therapy with proteasome inhibitors was allowed but refractory patients were excluded. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive K at a dose of 70 mg/m2 iv on days 1, 8 and 15 plus dexamethasone at a dose of 20 mg PO the day on and the day after K plus/minus KCyd at a dose of 300 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28 days-cycle, as continuous treatment until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS and key secondary endpoints included response rates, safety profile, and OS. Results: Between January 2018 and February 2020, 198 RRMM pts were included. 97 pts were randomized to KCyd and 101 to Kd. The baseline characteristics of the patients were well balanced between both groups. The median age was 70 years, and 70% and 28% of pts were older than 65 and 75. The median number of PL was one; 61% of pts had received 1 prior line. 94% and 92% of patients had been exposed to bortezomib in the KCyd and Kd and all of them were sensitive. 72% and 67% of patients had been exposed to IMiD's and 51% and 55% of them were IMiD's-refractory in the KCyd and Kd. Only 4 and 6 patients in KCyd and Kd, had received anti-CD38 antibodies being all refractory. After a median f/u of 15.6 months, median PFS was 20.7 m and 15.2 m in KCyd and Kd (p=0.2). In pts after 1PL, median PFS has not been reached in any arm (p=0.4) and in patients after 2-3PL, KCyd resulted in a median PFS of 20.7 vs 11m for Kd (p=0.4). Of note, in the IMiD-refractory population, the addition of Cy to Kd resulted in a significant benefit in terms of PFS: 26.2 months vs 7.7 months in the Kd arm (p=0.01). OS is immature with 23 and 25 events so far in KCyd and Kd, respectively. The ORR was 78% for KCyd and 73% for Kd: 20% of patients in both arms achieved at least complete response, 33% and 28% very good partial response, respectively, and 25% partial response in both arms. The MRD-ve rate was 4% and 5%. As far as toxicity is concerned, neutropenia was the only hematological adverse event more frequently reported in KCyd compared with Kd, of any grade (24% vs 11%) and grade 3-4 (13% vs 7%). This did not translate into more infections and the rate was comparable in both arms (5% G3-4 in both arms). Thrombocytopenia of any grade and grade 3-4 occurred in 14%/1% and 18%/10% in KCyd/Kd. Cardiovascular events of any grade occurred in 22% and 30% of patients in KCyd and Kd. Nine pts in KCyd developed G3-4 cardiovascular events, these included atrial fibrillation (1pt), cardiac failure (2 pts), myocardial infarct (2 pts), and hypertension (4 pts). In the Kd arm, 11 patients developed G3-4 cardiovascular events and consisted of hypertension in most of them (9 pts). Conclusion: Cyclophosphamide added to Kd 70 mg/m2 weekly in RRMM pts after 1-3 PL prolonged the PFS as compared to Kd particularly in the lenalidomide-refractory population. The administration of K at a dose of 70 mg/m2 weekly was safe and more convenient and overall, the toxicity profile was manageable in both arms. Disclosures Mateos: Abbvie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; PharmaMar-Zeltia: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ocio:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Asofarma: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy; MDS: Honoraria; Secura-Bio: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Sureda Balari:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck Sharpe and Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria. Oriol:Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosinol Dachs:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Blade Creixenti:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. San-Miguel:Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi, Roche, Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline and Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.